DOCSLIB.ORG

Pakistan in the Us, the Us in Pakistan: Self-Denial Is the Biggest Threat to World Peace

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Pakistan in the Us, the Us in Pakistan: Self-Denial Is the Biggest Threat to World Peace PAKISTAN IN THE US, THE US IN PAKISTAN: SELF-DENIAL IS THE BIGGEST THREAT TO WORLD PEACE Rakesh Krishnan Simha (He is a New Zealand-based journalist and foreign affairs analyst. He started his career in 1995 with New Delhi-based Business World magazine, and later worked in a string of positions at other leading media houses such as India Today, Hindustan Times, Business Standard and the Financial Express, where he was the news editor). Copyright: Research Institute for European and American Studies (www.rieas.gr) Publication date: 3 June 2016 One of the ironies of being a Pakistani living abroad, especially in the West, has to pose as Indian. According to Asghar Choudhri, the chairman of Brooklyn’s Pakistani American Merchant Association, a lot of Pakistanis can’t get jobs after 9/11 and after the botched Times Square bombing of 2010, it’s even worse. “They are now pretending they are Indian so they can get a job,” he told a US wire service. That is because while Indians are highly integrated immigrants – besides being the highest educated and best paid of all ethnic groups in the US – Pakistanis have taken part in terrorist activities in the very lands that gave them shelter. (Even the frequent Gallup surveys conducted in the US, found out repeatedly that the biggest threat to the international security and peace are: nr. 3 Saudis; nr. 2 Pakistanis, and nr.1 – surprise, surprise – the US itself.) From Ramzi Yousef, who bombed the World Trade Center in 1993 (8 years before Bin Laden) and is now serving a 240-year prison sentence to Mir Aimal Kansi, who shot dead CIA agents and was later executed by lethal injection, to Faisal Shahzad, the Times Square “Idiot Bomber”, there is a long line of Pakistanis who have left a trail of terror. The San Bernardino, California, attack of December 2015 by a Pakistani American couple was the most spectacular in recent times. The husband was American-born raised and yet he chose to launch a terror act against the people of the United States. But while Pakistanis wear an Indian mask for Western consumption, back home it’s business as usual. Two incidents amply demonstrate that Pakistanis have learnt nothing. One was the widespread outrage across the country over Osama Bin Laden’s killing by American commandos. In response to America’s exposure of Bin Laden’s hiding place, Pakistan moved to shut down the informant network that lead the Americans there. 1 The other was the unholy fracas over CIA shooter Kansi’s execution. The day after Kansi was sentenced to death by an American court, four Americans were shot dead on the streets of Pakistan. His funeral was attended by the entire civilian administration in his hometown Quetta, the local Pakistani Corps Commander, and the then Pakistani ambassador to the United States. Thousands of mourners turned out as Quetta city shuttered down. Kansi’s coffin, draped in black cloth with verses from the Koran embroidered on it in gold, was carried on the shoulders of young men some 10 miles from the airport to his family’s home in Quetta. In Islamabad, the capital city, lawyers and university students poured out on the streets. Misplaced sympathy The irony of outpourings of support for hardened terrorists is that Pakistan is seriously impacted by terrorism. A global study by the London-based Institute for Economics and Peace ranks Pakistan fourth on the Global Terrorism Index (GTI) list, behind Iraq, Afghanistan and Nigeria. According to the study, “Terrorism remains highly concentrated with most (58 per cent) of the activity occurring in just five countries — Iraq, Nigeria, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Syria.” It mentions the most fatal terrorist attack in Pakistan, of 2014: “Assailants detonated an explosives-laden vehicle and then stormed the Army Public School in Peshawar city, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province, Pakistan. At least 150 students and staff were killed and 131 were wounded in the attack. All seven assailants were either killed by security forces or detonated their explosives-laden vests.” The gunmen belonged to the terrorist group Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), which is also known as the Pakistani Taliban because it is based in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. It is an offshoot of the original Taliban which was created by Pakistan as a weapon to be used against Afghanistan and India. State sponsored terror That Pakistan is a state sponsor of terror is well known. In Hillary Clinton’s words to Islamabad, if you harbour snakes in your backyard, don’t expect them to only bite your neighbour. It was Pakistan’s demagogue dictator General Zia-ul-Haq who declared that “we will bleed India with a thousand cuts”. The reckoning was that since Pakistan can never hope to win a war against India, then India must be hit with terrorism. To this effect, Pakistan first supported Kashmiri and Sikh separatists, armed them and provided them safe bases on its territory. 2 When both these terror campaigns failed, Pakistan created an alphabet soup of home grown terror groups such as the Jaish-e-Mohammad, Lashkar-e-Taiba, Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, Jamaat- ud-Dawa and Harkat-ul-Jihad al-Islami. These two were complemented by the Haqqani network and the original Taliban, which has now split into dozens of splinter groups, some of which are still controlled by the Pakistan military and its chief intelligence agency, the ISI. Former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of US, Mike Mullen has described the Haqqani Network as the “veritable arm of Pakistan's ISI”. Mullen said the ISI was supporting the Haqqani network, which attacked the US embassy in Kabul in September 2011 and also the September 2011 NATO truck bombing which injured 77 coalition soldiers and killed five Afghan civilians. In a November 2014 interview to the BBC, the adviser to the Pakistani Prime Minister on National Security and Foreign Affairs, Sartaj Aziz said Pakistan should not target militants like the Afghan Taliban and Haqqani Network, which do not threaten Pakistan's security. Indeed, Pakistan is one of the few countries in the world which believes in good terrorists (who attack the West, India and Israel) and bad terrorists (who target Pakistan). An example of a ‘good’ terrorist group is the Jamaat-ud-Dawa, which regularly conducts mass rallies and congregation, advocating jihad in Kashmir. For its December 2014 rally, Pakistan ran two special trains to carry the crowd to Lahore. India's foreign ministry termed this as “nothing short of mainstreaming of terrorism”. The congregation was held near Pakistan's national monument, the Minar-e-Pakistan, where 4000 policemen provided security. Lashkar-e-Taiba is the group responsible for the November 2008 Mumbai terror attack, which led to the deaths of 156 innocent people. On December 3, 2008 Indian officials named Zaki- ur-Rehman Lakhavi, a top leader of the Lashkar, as one of four possible major planners behind the attacks. Four days later, Pakistani armed forces arrested Lakhvi in a raid on a training camp near Muzafarabad in Pakistani Kashmir. Destroying evidence Pakistan doesn’t want to bring terrorists like Lakhavi to justice because that would expose its sponsorship of terror groups. After India produced evidence of the Lashkar’s hand in the Mumbai attacks, Pakistan did the predictable. In order to claim that none of these guys were technically within Pakistan, the ISI asked the terrorists involved in the attack to leave the country. But it turned out to be a big mistake as one of these terrorists was caught in Saudi Arabia, which presented him on a platter to India. During his interrogation by Indian investigators, the terrorist revealed he was one of the key people tasked with training the 10 Mumbai attackers. He said he was in the control room near the international airport in Karachi from where Lakhavi was directing the attackers. He also said that after Lakhvi's arrest in December 2008, the Pakistanis destroyed the control room in Karachi. 3 Pathankot denial The January 2016 attack on an air force base in Pathankot, India, in which seven Indian security guards and six terrorists were killed, will give you an idea of how Pakistan continues to deny links with terror groups on its own soil. After the Indians allowed a Pakistani investigation team to visit the air base, the Pakistanis raised the outrageous claim that the attack was carried out by India to defame Islamabad. This has a parallel in 9/11 deniers in Muslim countries where everyone seems to be convinced that Israel and the US were behind the Twin Tower attacks. According to the Indian Express newspaper, the Pakistani investigators were given a full transcript of the telephonic conversations between the terrorists and their Pakistani handlers along with their identity. The Indian side gave the Pakistanis “the links of Pakistani officials, believed to be ISI personnel, with the handlers of the terrorists”. They were provided with “electronic and forensic evidence regarding the slain terrorists’ Pakistani links, name of the terrorists and several other critical evidence after an exhaustive probe conducted” by India. The Pakistani team was given concrete proof that a senior terrorist leader of the Jaish-e- Mohammed was in constant touch with the terrorists and giving them necessary instructions during the three-day carnage. And yet Pakistan claims it was a stage managed attack by India. Pakistan’s image The stark reality is that Pakistan has now become synonymous with terror. An unfortunate fallout of the country’s long association with terror is that ordinary Pakistanis worldwide appear tainted. A broad survey released on June 27, 2012 by the United States-based Pew Research Center’s Global Attitudes says that in a number countries, including China, as well as several Muslim countries such as Egypt, Tunisia, Jordan and Lebanon, the majority populations negatively view Pakistanis.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Counterterrorism CHAPTER 13 the Options
    Counterterrorism CHAPTER 13 The Options OPENING VIEWPOINT: THE DEATH OF OSAMA BIN LADEN Al-Qa’ida founder Osama bin Laden was killed during a individual. Based on other surveillance and circumstantial intel- raid by United States naval special forces on May 2, 2011, in ligence information, officials surmised that Osama bin Laden Abbottabad, Pakistan. The successful attack by a unit popularly resided at the compound with his couriers and their families. known as SEAL Team Six ended an intensive manhunt for the Options for assaulting thedistribute compound included a surgi- most wanted terrorist leader in the world. cal strike by special forces, deploying strategic bombers to The successful hunt for Osama bin Laden originated from obliterate the compound, or a joint operation with Pakistani fragments of information gleaned during interrogations of pris- security forces. Theor latter two options were rejected because oners over several years beginning in 2002. Believing that bin of the possibility of killing innocent civilians and distrust of Laden retained couriers to communicate with other operatives, Pakistani security agencies. Approximately two dozen SEAL interrogators focused their attention on questioning high-value commandos practiced intensely for the assault, and were targets about the existence and identities of these couriers. temporarily detailed to the CIA for the mission. A nighttime This focus was adopted with an assumption that bin Laden and helicopter-borne attack was commenced on May 2, 2011. other Al-Qa’ida leaders would rarely communicate using cellpost, The courier al-Kuwaiti and several others were killed during phone technology as a precaution against being intercepted by the assault, and women and children found in the compound Western intelligence agencies.
    [Show full text]
  • Patterns of Global Terrorism 1999
    U.S. Department of State, April 2000 Introduction The US Government continues its commitment to use all tools necessary—including international diplomacy, law enforcement, intelligence collection and sharing, and military force—to counter current terrorist threats and hold terrorists accountable for past actions. Terrorists seek refuge in “swamps” where government control is weak or governments are sympathetic. We seek to drain these swamps. Through international and domestic legislation and strengthened law enforcement, the United States seeks to limit the room in which terrorists can move, plan, raise funds, and operate. Our goal is to eliminate terrorist safehavens, dry up their sources of revenue, break up their cells, disrupt their movements, and criminalize their behavior. We work closely with other countries to increase international political will to limit all aspects of terrorists’ efforts. US counterterrorist policies are tailored to combat what we believe to be the shifting trends in terrorism. One trend is the shift from well-organized, localized groups supported by state sponsors to loosely organized, international networks of terrorists. Such a network supported the failed attempt to smuggle explosives material and detonating devices into Seattle in December. With the decrease of state funding, these loosely networked individuals and groups have turned increasingly to other sources of funding, including private sponsorship, narcotrafficking, crime, and illegal trade. This shift parallels a change from primarily politically motivated terrorism to terrorism that is more religiously or ideologically motivated. Another trend is the shift eastward of the locus of terrorism from the Middle East to South Asia, specifically Afghanistan. As most Middle Eastern governments have strengthened their counterterrorist response, terrorists and their organizations have sought safehaven in areas where they can operate with impunity.
    [Show full text]
  • Global War on Terrorism and Prosecution of Terror Suspects: Select Cases and Implications for International Law, Politics, and Security
    GLOBAL WAR ON TERRORISM AND PROSECUTION OF TERROR SUSPECTS: SELECT CASES AND IMPLICATIONS FOR INTERNATIONAL LAW, POLITICS, AND SECURITY Srini Sitaraman Introduction The global war on terrorism has opened up new frontiers of transnational legal challenge for international criminal law and counterterrorism strategies. How do we convict terrorists who transcend multiple national boundaries for committing and plotting mass atrocities; what are the hurdles in extraditing terrorism suspects; what are the consequences of holding detainees in black sites or secret prisons; what interrogation techniques are legal and appropriate when questioning terror suspects? This article seeks to examine some of these questions by focusing on the Global War on Terrorism (GWOT), particularly in the context of counterterrorism strategies that the United States have pursued towards Afghanistan-Pakistan (Af-Pak) since the September 2001 terror attacks on New York and Washington D.C. The focus of this article is on the methods employed to confront terror suspects and terror facilitators and not on the politics of cooperation between the United States and Pakistan on the Global War on Terrorism or on the larger military operation being conducted in Afghanistan and in the border regions of Pakistan. This article is not positioned to offer definitive answers or comprehensive analyses of all pertinent issues associated with counterterrorism strategies and its effectiveness, which would be beyond the scope of this effort. The objective is to raise questions about the policies that the United States have adopted in conducting the war on terrorism and study its implications for international law and security. It is to examine whether the overzealousness in the execution of this war on terror has generated some unintended consequences for international law and complicated the global judicial architecture in ways that are not conducive to the democratic propagation of human rights.
    [Show full text]
  • Shooting at CIA HQ Remains a Mystery
    Click here for Full Issue of EIR Volume 20, Number 9, February 26, 1993 had successfully penetrated an intelligence operation involv­ ing Israeli, Chinese, and Russian age"ts. According to pub­ lished accounts, Darling may have been involved in supply­ ing arms to CIA-backed Afghan Mujiahideen rebels during the 1980s. If the shootings were actually aimed at Darling (he was Shooting at CIA HQ shot three times, whereas all the other victims were only shot once), the question then emerges: Was the "hit" carried remains a mystery out by one of the three intelligence agencies cited above? An assassination in broad daylight, outside the main gate of by Jeffrey Steinberg CIA headquarters, is quite a provo¢ative act, and could trigger the kind of bloody intelligence warfare that often characterized the tensest moments of the Cold War. Even though the FBI and Fairfax County, Virginia police have identified a Pakistani national, Mir Aimal Kansi, as the A lot of blue smoke and mirrors man who shot five people outside the main gate of the CIA Predictably, the American media have had a field day at Langley on Jan. 25, many crucial questions about the speculating about the suspected killer Mir Aimal Kansi. terrorist incident remain unanswered, and many experienced Among the most bizarre features of hiS profile is his employ­ observers believe that the mystery will never be solved. Dur­ ment by a courier service owned by the son of former CIA ing the Monday morning rush hour on Jan. 25, a man armed official Victor Marchetti. A former executive assistant to the with a rifle walked down a row of cars stopped at a traffic deputy to CIA director Richard Helms, Marchetti quit the light on Route 123 just outside the main headquarters of the agency in 1969 and wrote one of the earliest exposes of U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • 9-11 and Terrorist Travel- Full
    AND TERRORIST TRAVEL Staff Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States 9/11 AND TERRORIST TRAVEL Staff Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States By Thomas R. Eldridge Susan Ginsburg Walter T. Hempel II Janice L. Kephart Kelly Moore and Joanne M. Accolla, Staff Assistant Alice Falk, Editor Note from the Executive Director The Commission staff organized its work around specialized studies, or monographs, prepared by each of the teams. We used some of the evolving draft material for these studies in preparing the seventeen staff statements delivered in conjunction with the Commission’s 2004 public hearings. We used more of this material in preparing draft sections of the Commission’s final report. Some of the specialized staff work, while not appropriate for inclusion in the report, nonetheless offered substantial information or analysis that was not well represented in the Commission’s report. In a few cases this supplemental work could be prepared to a publishable standard, either in an unclassified or classified form, before the Commission expired. This study is on immigration, border security and terrorist travel issues. It was prepared principally by Thomas Eldridge, Susan Ginsburg, Walter T. Hempel II, Janice Kephart, and Kelly Moore, with assistance from Joanne Accolla, and editing assistance from Alice Falk. As in all staff studies, they often relied on work done by their colleagues. This is a study by Commission staff. While the Commissioners have been briefed on the work and have had the opportunity to review earlier drafts of some of this work, they have not approved this text and it does not necessarily reflect their views.
    [Show full text]
  • Terrorism and Counterterrorism SEPTEMBER 17, 2015 – DECEMBER 2, 2015
    Terrorism and Counterterrorism SEPTEMBER 17, 2015 – DECEMBER 2, 2015 DEFINITION OF TERMS HANDOUT We've taken these definitions from the following: 9/11 Commission Report, Wikipedia, Encyclopedia Britannica, Merriam-Webster, Marie-Helen Maras (Counterterrorism), Psychwiki, Mitchell Silber (The Al-Qaeda Factor), Andrew Kydd and Barbara Walter (Strategies of Terrorism), Federation of American Scientists, CIA Guide to the Analysis of Insurgency, Bruce Hoffman (Inside Terrorism), Janes Insurgency & Terrorism Centre, U.S. Department of Defense, Council on Foreign Relations, PBS, Harry Henderson (Global Terrorism), Harry Henderson (Terrorism), Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs, The Encyclopedia of the Arab-Israeli Conflict: A Political, Social, and Military History, ed. Spencer C. Tucker, Priscilla Roberts, Hussain Haqqani (Pakistan: Between Mosque and Military), Contemporary World Issues: U.S. National Security: A Reference Handbook, Second Edition, "Homeland Security: Legal and Policy Issues," Cornell Law School's Legal Information Institute, USLegal, The 9/11 Encyclopedia: Second Edition, the Denver Post, Harvey W. Kushner (Encyclopedia of Terrorism), Federal Judicial Center, Counterterrorism Data Mining, Gus Martin (Understanding Terrorism: Challenges, Perspectives, and Issues), and West Point's Combating Terrorism Center. At times we modified them based on course content, and in others we used text, at times exact, from these sources. Should you wish to know the particular sourcing of any term, please contact Marc Meyer at [email protected]. ​ ​ Section Key Term Definition Index 1,2 9/11 Attacks On September 11, 2011, nineteen terrorists, directed by Al-Qaeda, high jacked four commercial passenger jets, killing almost 3,000 people and injuring thousands more. Two of the airliners crashed into the World Trade Center in New York City, causing both buildings to collapse, while a third plane crashed into the Pentagon outside of Washington, D.C.
    [Show full text]
  • Patterns of Global Terrorism, 1993
    Terrorism Resources PATTERNS OF GLOBAL TERRORISM, 1993 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE Office of the Secretary Office of the Coordinator for CounterterrorismDepartment of State Publication 10136 APRIL 1994 CONTENTS ● Introduction ● The Year in Review ● African Overview ● Asian Overview ● European Overview ● Latin American Overview ● Middle Eastern Overview ● State-Sponsored Terrorism Overview ● International Community Action Against Terrorism ● Appendixes U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE 1994 APRIL: PATTERNS OF GLOBAL TERRORISM, 1993 Department of State Publication 10136 Office of the Secretary Office of the Coordinator for Counterterrorism CONTENTS ● Introduction ● Legislative Requirements ● Definitions ● Note Introduction Global issues are a central focus of the Clinton administration, and international terrorism is one of the deadliest and most persistent. Terrorism made the headlines throughout 1993: ● The World Trade Center bombing in February. ● The foiled Iraqi plat to assassinate former President Bush in Kuwait in April. ● Numerous coordinated attacks by the Kurdistan Workers Party throughout Western Europe on two separate dates in June and November. It is clear that terrorism is an issue that will remain with us for quite some time. The focus of the US counterterrorism policy for more than a decade has been simple and direct: ● Make no concessions. ● Apply the rule of law and improve the capabilities of friendly governments to counter the threat they face. ● Apply pressure on state sponsors. The key to a successful, long-term counterterrorism policy is international cooperation on these three basic elements. The United States enforced this policy in many ways during the past year: ● When it became clear that the Government of Iraq was responsible for the foiled plot to kill former President Bush, the United States used military force to demonstrate to Saddam Husayn that such behavior would not be tolerated.
    [Show full text]
  • Kasi V. Angelone 300 F.3D 487 (4Th Cir
    Capital Defense Journal Volume 15 | Issue 1 Article 18 Fall 9-1-2002 Kasi v. Angelone 300 F.3d 487 (4th Cir. 2002) Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/wlucdj Part of the International Law Commons, and the Law Enforcement and Corrections Commons Recommended Citation Kasi v. Angelone 300 F.3d 487 (4th Cir. 2002), 15 Cap. DEF J. 203 (2002). Available at: https://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/wlucdj/vol15/iss1/18 This Casenote, U.S. Fourth Circuit is brought to you for free and open access by the Law School Journals at Washington & Lee University School of Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Capital Defense Journal by an authorized editor of Washington & Lee University School of Law Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Kasi v. Angelone 300 F.3d 487 (4th Cir. 2002) L Facts On Monday, January 25, 1993, a lone gunman emerged from his car and opened fire with an AK-47 assault rifle on a line of automobiles waiting to enter the Central Intelligence Agency ("CIA"). Two CIA employees, Frank Darling ("Darling") and Lansing Bennett ("Bennett") were killed, three other CIA employees, Nicholas Starr, Calvin Morgan, and Stephen Williams were wounded. All five victims were waiting to enter the CIA headquarters in Fairfax, Virginia, in separate automobiles. The gunman, identified as MirAimalKasi ("Kasi"), also known as Mir Aimal Kansi, fled the scene.' Kasi, a native of Pakistan, was working as a driver for a local courier service and lived in Reston, Virginia with a friend, Zahed Mir ("MNW).
    [Show full text]
  • Pakistan-US Relations
    Order Code IB94041 CRS Issue Brief for Congress Received through the CRS Web Pakistan-U.S. Relations Updated December 31, 2001 Barbara Leitch LePoer Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division Congressional Research Service The Library of Congress CONTENTS SUMMARY MOST RECENT DEVELOPMENTS BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS Context of the Relationship Historical Background U.S. 1990 Aid Cut-off Pakistan-India Rivalry The China Factor Pakistan Political Setting Background Pakistan-U.S. Relations and Bilateral Issues Security Nuclear Weapons and Missile Proliferation U.S. Nonproliferation Efforts Congressional Action Pakistan-U.S. Military Cooperation Democratization and Human Rights Democratization Efforts Human Rights Problems Economic Issues Economic Reforms and Market Opening Trade and Trade Issues Narcotics Terrorism CHRONOLOGY IB94041 12-31-01 Pakistan-U.S. Relations SUMMARY The major areas of U.S. concern in Paki- ity to waive, for two years, sanctions imposed stan include: nuclear nonproliferation; counter- on Pakistan following its 1999 military coup. terrorism; regional stability; democratization and human rights; and economic reform and Both Congress and the Administration development. An ongoing Pakistan-India consider a stable, democratic, economically nuclear arms race, fueled by rivalry over Kash- thriving Pakistan as key to U.S. interests in mir, continues to be the focus of U.S. South, Central, and West Asia. Although nonproliferation efforts in South Asia and a ruled by military regimes for half of its exis- major issue in U.S. relations with both coun- tence, from 1988-99, Pakistan had democratic tries. This attention intensified following governments as a result of national elections in nuclear tests by both India and Pakistan in 1988, 1990, 1993, and 1997.
    [Show full text]
  • Strategic Choices: Four Legal Models for Counterterrorism in Pakistan
    ARTICLE Strategic Choices: Four Legal Models for Counterterrorism in Pakistan James J. Saulino* I. Introduction In 2004, the 9/11 Commission made clear the need for a comprehensive and sustained U.S. counterterrorism strategy in Pakistan. “It is hard to overstate the importance of Pakistan in the struggle against Islamist terrorism,” the Commissioners wrote, urging U.S. policymakers to “make the difficult long-term commitment to the future of Pakistan.”1 They went on to note both the particular challenge posed by Pakistan and the need for cooperation with the Pakistani government.2 Accordingly, the Commission recommended the development of “a realistic strategy to keep possible terrorists insecure and on the run, using all elements of national power.”3 This kind of all-fronts counterterrorism policy in Pakistan had begun to take shape even before the 9/11 Commission issued its recommendations. Abu Zubaydah and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed were apprehended in 2002 and 2003 as part of a joint effort between Pakistan and U.S. intelligence agencies, and the Pakistani military began an offensive in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas in 2004.4 In subsequent years, * J.D. candidate, Harvard Law School, 2011; M.P.P. candidate, Harvard Kennedy School of Government, 2011; A.B., Princeton University, 2003. The author would like to thank Professor Eric Rosenbach for his guidance and assistance with this project. 1 NATIONAL COMMISSION ON TERRORIST ATTACKS UPON THE UNITED STATES, FINAL REPORT 369 (2004) [hereinafter 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT]. 2 Id. at 368. 3 Id. at 367. 4 Tim McGirk, Anatomy of a Raid, TIME, Apr.
    [Show full text]
  • Present: All the Justices MIR AIMAL KASI OPINION by JUSTICE A
    Present: All the Justices MIR AIMAL KASI OPINION BY JUSTICE A. CHRISTIAN COMPTON v. Record Nos. 980797 November 6, 1998 980798 COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF FAIRFAX COUNTY J. Howe Brown, Judge On Monday, January 25, 1993, near 8:00 a.m., a number of automobiles were stopped in two north-bound, left-turn lanes on Route 123 in Fairfax County at the main entrance to the headquarters of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). The vehicle operators had stopped for a red traffic light and were waiting to turn into the entrance. At the same time, a lone gunman emerged from another vehicle, which he had stopped behind the automobiles. The gunman, armed with an AK-47 assault rifle, proceeded to move among the automobiles firing the weapon into them. Within a few seconds, Frank Darling and Lansing Bennett were killed and Nicholas Starr, Calvin Morgan, and Stephen Williams were wounded by the gunshots. All the victims were CIA employees and were operators of separate automobiles. The gunman, later identified as defendant Mir Aimal Kasi, also known as Mir Aimal Kansi, fled the scene. At this time, defendant, a native of Pakistan, was residing in an apartment in Reston with a friend, Zahed Mir. Defendant was employed as a driver for a local courier service and was familiar with the area surrounding the CIA entrance. The day after the shootings, defendant returned to Pakistan. Two days later, Mir reported to the police that defendant was a "missing person." On February 8, 1993, the police searched Mir's apartment and discovered the weapon used in the shootings as well as other property of defendant.
    [Show full text]
  • Ghost Wars: the Secret History of the CIA, Afghanistan, and Bin Laden, F
    Ghost Wars: The Secret History of the CIA, Afghanistan, and bin Laden, f... http://www.carnegiecouncil.org/resources/transcripts/4421.html/:pf_print... Ghost Wars: The Secret History of the CIA, Afghanistan, and bin Laden, from the Soviet Invasion to September 10, 2001 Steve Coll , Joanne J. Myers March 1, 2004 Introduction Remarks Questions and Answers Introduction JOANNE MYERS: Good morning. I’m Joanne Myers, Director of Merrill House Programs, and on behalf of the Carnegie Council I’d like to thank you for joining us as we welcome Steve Coll to speak about Ghost Wars: The Secret History of the CIA, Afghanistan, and bin Laden, Ghost Wars: The from the Soviet Invasion to September 10, 2001. Secret History of the CIA, Afghanistan, and In the wake of what is currently perceived as the CIA’s historic failure on September 11, bin Laden, from the Soviet Invasion to much of the postmortem on the attack has focused on the failures of communication and September 10, 2001 information-sharing among the CIA, the FBI, and the National Security Agency, and their inability to connect the so-called dots. While it now appears that there certainly was a paucity of dot-connecting prior to 9/11, this begs the more important question as to whether there were realistically enough dots to connect. The literature on this and related topics flows on in an unabated fashion. However, with the publication of Ghost Wars, at last we have a comprehensive and penetrating account of the inside story of the U.S. involvement in Afghanistan as to what actually happened, or more precisely, what did not happen.
    [Show full text]